Comments on: What Narrative? Edward R. Murrow's "I Can Hear it Now"http://www.historynet.com/what-narrative-edward-r-murrows-i-can-hear-it-now.htm
From the World's Largest History Magazine PublisherTue, 31 Mar 2015 17:09:11 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2By: Terry Bratthttp://www.historynet.com/what-narrative-edward-r-murrows-i-can-hear-it-now.htm#comment-1639137
Terry BrattSat, 12 Oct 2013 01:33:37 +0000http://www.historynet.com/?p=13683942#comment-1639137Grandmother left me a 5 record set entitled \I can hear it now\ in original box and sleeves in mint condition considering there age 78 rpm records . They have Columbia masterworks set mm-800 Edward R Murrow and Fred W Friendly copyright 1948 on the cover. 1st album is stamped 72711-D XCO 39891.
Anyone know the value of these thick hard non vinyl 78 records? If so PLEASE contact me my daughter is sick and I need the money desperately thank you 901-415-4531Grandmother left me a 5 record set entitled \I can hear it now\ in original box and sleeves in mint condition considering there age 78 rpm records . They have Columbia masterworks set mm-800 Edward R Murrow and Fred W Friendly copyright 1948 on the cover. 1st album is stamped 72711-D XCO 39891.

Anyone know the value of these thick hard non vinyl 78 records? If so PLEASE contact me my daughter is sick and I need the money desperately thank you 901-415-4531

]]>By: Chris Grattanhttp://www.historynet.com/what-narrative-edward-r-murrows-i-can-hear-it-now.htm#comment-811990
Chris GrattanThu, 12 Jul 2012 01:20:24 +0000http://www.historynet.com/?p=13683942#comment-811990In 1971 Fred Friendly and Walter Cronkite produced a 3-LP set, "I Can Hear It Now-The Sixties." The original series had been enormously popular in its time, and it was hoped that this might be as well. Interesting in terms of the narrative of the decade as it was understood by these two mainstream journalists (Cronkite was still anchoring the CBS Evening News at the time). It has been available on CD. The Murrow-Friendly series (there was a volume 2 that covered the postwar era up to Truman's 1949 inauguration, and a volume 3 that used mostly re-enacted voices that covered the period from the failure of the Versailles Treaty ratification to FDR's first inauguration) has not been available on CD, though it was had an early release on LP and a couple of subsequent re-releases in that format (including a boxed set). It's too bad, because the recordings really do give the listener a good sense of how people understood what were then recent events.In 1971 Fred Friendly and Walter Cronkite produced a 3-LP set, "I Can Hear It Now-The Sixties." The original series had been enormously popular in its time, and it was hoped that this might be as well. Interesting in terms of the narrative of the decade as it was understood by these two mainstream journalists (Cronkite was still anchoring the CBS Evening News at the time). It has been available on CD. The Murrow-Friendly series (there was a volume 2 that covered the postwar era up to Truman's 1949 inauguration, and a volume 3 that used mostly re-enacted voices that covered the period from the failure of the Versailles Treaty ratification to FDR's first inauguration) has not been available on CD, though it was had an early release on LP and a couple of subsequent re-releases in that format (including a boxed set). It's too bad, because the recordings really do give the listener a good sense of how people understood what were then recent events.
]]>By: Patrick Mianohttp://www.historynet.com/what-narrative-edward-r-murrows-i-can-hear-it-now.htm#comment-678222
Patrick MianoSat, 06 Aug 2011 21:27:19 +0000http://www.historynet.com/?p=13683942#comment-678222In balance, the Allies fought substantially more humanely than the Axis. The Allied war effort was not a crusade, but it was a good thing. In such a total war, it is idiocy to expect even the "right" side to be morally pure. It is just an excuse to advance the pacifist "no war is justified" agenda. The Allies were mostly right, the Axis were mostly wrong. That is enough.In balance, the Allies fought substantially more humanely than the Axis. The Allied war effort was not a crusade, but it was a good thing. In such a total war, it is idiocy to expect even the "right" side to be morally pure. It is just an excuse to advance the pacifist "no war is justified" agenda. The Allies were mostly right, the Axis were mostly wrong. That is enough.
]]>By: DPCIIhttp://www.historynet.com/what-narrative-edward-r-murrows-i-can-hear-it-now.htm#comment-670955
DPCIIMon, 01 Aug 2011 21:27:00 +0000http://www.historynet.com/?p=13683942#comment-670955Well you did say crusade, Christ, World War II, and admitted to the infamous historian culpability of moral einseitigkeit all in one entry so I'm sure there were a few instant-stroke casualties in the readership. It wouldn't be fun if there wasn't any conflict though, especially since you get to handle the emails and not me.
I personally stand on the side of argument that says that not enough has been done to bring to light the atrocities of the winning side. I'm not one to believe that objective truth is possible to find in this life, though I believe it exists apart from ourselves and is a worthy goal for anyone willing to pursue it. By exposing the mea culpa that we as humans have in every nation and race for committing atrocity, we disarm the convenient narrative that it was the "evil X race or nation or political party" at fault, and certainly not us. Certainly not I. I would never, my people would never do this or that. This is ultimately the mental acrobatics of terrified human beings, who shrivel at the thought of facing who we are.
I think this is what the author intended, but by all means correct me if I'm wrong.Well you did say crusade, Christ, World War II, and admitted to the infamous historian culpability of moral einseitigkeit all in one entry so I'm sure there were a few instant-stroke casualties in the readership. It wouldn't be fun if there wasn't any conflict though, especially since you get to handle the emails and not me.

I personally stand on the side of argument that says that not enough has been done to bring to light the atrocities of the winning side. I'm not one to believe that objective truth is possible to find in this life, though I believe it exists apart from ourselves and is a worthy goal for anyone willing to pursue it. By exposing the mea culpa that we as humans have in every nation and race for committing atrocity, we disarm the convenient narrative that it was the "evil X race or nation or political party" at fault, and certainly not us. Certainly not I. I would never, my people would never do this or that. This is ultimately the mental acrobatics of terrified human beings, who shrivel at the thought of facing who we are.

I think this is what the author intended, but by all means correct me if I'm wrong.

]]>By: Mike H.http://www.historynet.com/what-narrative-edward-r-murrows-i-can-hear-it-now.htm#comment-668470
Mike H.Sat, 30 Jul 2011 22:08:54 +0000http://www.historynet.com/?p=13683942#comment-668470The trouble, Robert, has always been the tendency of historians to either (a) glorify or (b) demonize one side or the other in WWII...or, for that matter, in any war. The losers are usually the ones that fall into category (b)...but that has nearly always been a universal truth: that History is written by the winning side. All that said, I, for one, am always willing to listen to a new view, as long as that view is supported with facts and substantiated evidence. In short, I'm want the truth, and not something based on long-held prejudices. What comes immediately to mind is the crapola that the Holocaust never happened...that it is "Zionist Propaganda". And, no, of course our hands aren't clean...War is a nasty, brutal business. However, I have never heard of anything remotely resembling Sonderkommando Dirlewanger" on our side...nor the wholesale slaughter of already-surrendered German or Japanese by the British or American troops. (now, our "gallant Sovet allies"? That's another story...) In any event, PLEASE keep up your fine work. You know you're getting it right when you can (and do) get people frothing at the mouth when you tell the truth.The trouble, Robert, has always been the tendency of historians to either (a) glorify or (b) demonize one side or the other in WWII…or, for that matter, in any war. The losers are usually the ones that fall into category (b)…but that has nearly always been a universal truth: that History is written by the winning side. All that said, I, for one, am always willing to listen to a new view, as long as that view is supported with facts and substantiated evidence. In short, I'm want the truth, and not something based on long-held prejudices. What comes immediately to mind is the crapola that the Holocaust never happened…that it is "Zionist Propaganda". And, no, of course our hands aren't clean…War is a nasty, brutal business. However, I have never heard of anything remotely resembling Sonderkommando Dirlewanger" on our side…nor the wholesale slaughter of already-surrendered German or Japanese by the British or American troops. (now, our "gallant Sovet allies"? That's another story…) In any event, PLEASE keep up your fine work. You know you're getting it right when you can (and do) get people frothing at the mouth when you tell the truth.
]]>By: Jacob DeWitthttp://www.historynet.com/what-narrative-edward-r-murrows-i-can-hear-it-now.htm#comment-668315
Jacob DeWittSat, 30 Jul 2011 20:40:25 +0000http://www.historynet.com/?p=13683942#comment-668315Seems like Murrow told it like he saw it. I would think those records are more interesting as a source revealing what Americans heard and thought about the country's involvement in the war.
I got this narrative from the books, documentaries, and movies I ate up as a kid, much of which was made in the first decades after the war. I have read a lot since then, and nothing has really shaken that narrative for me. The truth is messier, but it's a messy world.
As for the last paragraph, I agree entirely. I still think the Allies were right, and that the Axis powers had to be stopped, but I don't doubt for a second that we did things that caused a great deal of suffering for millions. Isn't that why we generally prescribe against war these days?Seems like Murrow told it like he saw it. I would think those records are more interesting as a source revealing what Americans heard and thought about the country's involvement in the war.
I got this narrative from the books, documentaries, and movies I ate up as a kid, much of which was made in the first decades after the war. I have read a lot since then, and nothing has really shaken that narrative for me. The truth is messier, but it's a messy world.

As for the last paragraph, I agree entirely. I still think the Allies were right, and that the Axis powers had to be stopped, but I don't doubt for a second that we did things that caused a great deal of suffering for millions. Isn't that why we generally prescribe against war these days?

]]>By: Dave Thttp://www.historynet.com/what-narrative-edward-r-murrows-i-can-hear-it-now.htm#comment-666699
Dave TFri, 29 Jul 2011 19:56:10 +0000http://www.historynet.com/?p=13683942#comment-666699Dr. C,
I agree with your last paragraph. I too grew up with the 'narrative' as a Navy brat in the 50's and early 60's. It is okay to challenge the narrative, just don't change the facts...as some revisionists will do to fit their 'narrative'.Dr. C,
I agree with your last paragraph. I too grew up with the 'narrative' as a Navy brat in the 50's and early 60's. It is okay to challenge the narrative, just don't change the facts…as some revisionists will do to fit their 'narrative'.
]]>